Best. Reaction. Ever.

me, to the bus driver: thanks.

Bus driver, to me: My Man!!! You know it!

made my day.

NY,NY

Crosswords and Crayons

Today on the subway I was people watching, as I’m wont to do when I don’t have any reading material (which I didn’t). I was particularly interested in the homeless-looking man across the way from me. Not that I have a perverse interest in the actions of the homeless on trains or anything, but because I couldn’t quite figure him out.

By all appearances he looked homeless: long scraggly hair, a certain unwashed quality to both his skin and his clothes, bad shoes, etc. But a couple of things threw me off. 1) he was wearing a New York City Parks and Recreation Department jacket and 2) he was holding a New York Post (a rag, yes, but decidedly not free) and preparing to do the crossword puzzle - another seemingly non-homeless thing to do.

And as I sat there, silently debating whether the P&R Dept. has some interesting hiring processes or if this is just a new homeless man, he pulled out his writing utensil and got to work on the crossword.

It was a crayon.

Now I’m not sure if it’s just a crazy homeless man or the City is seriously cutting back on funding. Either way, it was my stop. And I left him to his puzzle.

NY,NY

The Future

Will the nation state matter in the long term? Will large corporations eventually raise armies against each other and against governments? Or will global conglomerates fail to be replaced by more manageable small-mid sized businesses? Will there eventually be a global government that has some semblance of power (sorry, UN)?

NY,NY

Man's Best Friend

Dogs are amazing pets. They’re fiercely loyal and they love you unconditionally. I mean truly unconditionally. All you have to do is not kill them and they never stop loving you. I guess you occasionally have to feed them and take them on walks and such and clean up their waste and such. But that’s a small price to pay for loyalty, love and companionship.

Euthanizing an old dog is really hard to do. They’ve been a part of your life for years. We had to put down one of our dogs this weekend and it’s like losing a member of the family.

Here’s hoping that doggy heaven exists and is full of leftover pizza, other delicious table food, squirrels to chase and things to play with. If you’re drinking anytime soon, raise a glass to Magic, one hell of a dog.

NY,NY

Awkward Steps

Here’s the situation:

You arrive at a bank of elevators and see that a door is waiting open for you, so you walk towards it - turns out, though, that there are people in the elevator already.

Just as you walk pass through the threshold, the doors are closing. Except instead of closing, you’re in the way and the doors bounce back open. The people have obviously been waiting on the elevator long enough for the doors to close and start their long-waited ascent, and you’ve ruined it. To make matters worse, you reset the door clock and even more people come strolling into the elevator all smiley and happy because they were fortunate enough to not have to wait for an elevator today.

Now the original elevator folks start to glare more and more angrily at you while you can do nothing more than stand there sheepishly, silently apologizing that you didn’t know the doors would be closing as you walked through.

You ruined their elevator ride. And they’re glaring at you. If you’re fortunate enough, like I am, to have mirrored elevator doors, there’s nowhere to hide.

AWKWARD.

NY,NY

Two Minutes to Save the World?

Walking to the train today I passed two pairs of Green Peace volunteers on the street trying to get random folks to spare a few minutes to save the planet.

The pairs were located not two blocks away, only separated by the time it took me to round a corner. Basically, they saw the same foot traffic - some walking to the train, some walking away.

The first group was two youngish guys … but nobody was talking to them - people just brushed right past them.

The second (or first, depending on your walking direction) pair was two cute girls. BIG surprise here: they had all kinds of guys talking to them. Same message, same delivery, same Green Peace tee shirts and clipboards.

Are we men really just that weak? Will we really use any excuse to talk to a cute girl on the street? Or would the situation be reversed in Chelsea? What if the two male volunteers wore expensive custom suits? OOO I know! Have them leaning against a shiny new sports car, oozing wealth. Would women be talking to them?

Or you know what? Maybe people just don’t have two minutes to save the world. Sorry, Green Peace, people are too busy trying to keep food on the table.

NY,NY

Public (un)Safety Announcement

I heard an MTA announcement today on the subway that said, “Keep your money in your sights at all times.” That’s verbatim, people.

And, I guess the real message here would be something along these lines:

“Know where your money is at all times” or

“Be cognizant of your wallet’s location at all times” or

“Occasionally discreetly check for your wallet” or

“Don’t let people steal your shit” or

“If you check for your wallet, people will likely target you as a tourist, thus rendering this whole wallet-checking exercise pretty useless.”

Certainly the writer of this PSA should have realized that if my money is always in MY sights, it’s most definitely also in the sights of the very thieves i’m trying to protect it from? You’d think with all the out of work white collar folks milling about New York, the MTA could hire someone with writing ability to keep the public safe via announcements. But hey, cuts happen everywhere.

And besides, we can pick out tourists without them anxiously checking their fanny packs every few minutes.

www.nonsensicalsensibility.tumblr.com

Things That Could Have Been Avoided

For years now I’ve been telling my friends and family someday I’m going to have a guard lion or tiger or bear that will be sweet and domesticated for me, but deadly to unwanted intruders.

I realized, though, that having a pet bear to roll around and wrestle with was a silly pipe dream that would never really happen - largely because the bear would kill me.

It’s the same reason my mom wouldn’t let me get a pet boa constrictor when I was a kid. “The snake doesn’t know you’re not food,” she would say. And, sure, she was right. The snake (when fully grown) would likely view sleeping-me as just another helpless victim, crush me, and ingest me whole, as giant boas are wont to do.

A pet bear would also likely see me as something to attack, no matter how much I loved it and let it roam free throughout my house. The pet bear would probably be even more likely to attack me if I kept it stuck in a cage.

This woman, rest her soul, seemed not to think through the potential repercussions of actually having a pet bear. Or lion. Or tiger. Read about it here.

SERIOUSLY?! Killed by pet bear? No kidding. Here’s how this could have been avoided: DON’T GET A BEAR FOR A PET.

NY,NY

Oh, Hold On. Let Me Try My OTHER Phone

Today I saw a man at the pharmacy walk up to the register to check out. He was texting/typing on his blackberry, wearing a blue tooth headset, and proudly displaying a second cell phone on a holster clip on his belt. Normally, this blatant overuse of cellular devices would just be a bit annoying and might cause me to scoff or laugh at this person.

BUT

This cell phone maniac then proceeded to purchase a bunch of candy … WITH FOOD STAMPS!!

Really, guy?! You have a blackberry, a cell phone, a blue tooth AND you want to pay with food stamps?! Get the hell out of here. I had no idea food stamps could pay a cell phone bill. Give me a freaking break. If you’re going to cheat the system like that, at least put some effort into it.

Future Me Must Own A Delorean

Have you ever run into or seen someone out in the world and thought: I wonder if that person is ME … from the future…

And then, just as you’re about to ask a question that only future you would know (because you’ve obviously thought about this before and have a question at the ready…) you come to a terrible realization.

You CAN’T ask!

That would completely screw up the space/time continuum, ending all life as we know it (or something like that) - and you certainly don’t want that hanging over your head.

So now you’re left not knowing…

… unless you try really hard to remember this moment in future, but, as you are wont to do, you forget. Until you see past you and remember. That would really blow your future mind…

New Blogging Venture

Check out my new start. http://nonsensicalsensibility.tumblr.com/

Some fiction...

This is something I wrote a bit ago but really enjoy and wanted to share. It's a short short that I wrote in an inner monologue type style. Enjoy.

There she is, the girl of my dreams, if only I knew her name. Look at her, she looks so gorge…oh shit. She saw me staring at her. Look away. LOOK. AWAY. Play it cool, loot at the intricate architecture in the room...Ok, she’s not looking, back to staring. She looks good in her cute little outfit, just waiting for me to talk to her. Well…maybe not me, but she probably wants someone to talk to her. Might as well be me, right? Right. Just go talk to her, I can’t just keep staring…well, I guess I couuuld..NO! I can’t be the creepy ogling guy. Ok, she’s looking away, GO GO! Be graceful, confident, suave even, just don’t scare her away. She’s looking. HIDE! Dive out of sight. Pretend the people landed on didn’t notice. Stand up, act confused, look around and whisper “Who was that guy?” Shrug, shake your head in bewilderment, and get back in the game. Stay in the shadows, keep your eye on the target, but don’t let the target see you. Target? Who am I? Rambo? Who says target? Wow. Oh no. She’s looking at me. Eye contact, not good. Game over, you lose. Nice work, Rambo. Wait….she’s smiling! And what’s this? A flirty looked coupled with a flip of the hair? I’m so in! Ok, now, just walk up to her, strike up witty banter, and win her heart with charm and humor. Can’t be too hard I’ve seen it done in movies, and if they do it in the movies, I can obviously do it in real life. Just keep walking and smiling. Doing great, just don’t screw u….SHIT! ok, I know she was looking right at you, but maybe, MAYBE she didn’t see you trip and fall. Play this off as nothing. I know you fell down some steps, but you made it look smooth, calculated. Pretend you dropped something, or do a push up, show off your athletic prowess. Wait! No! don’t leave….she left. It was probably the push up thing. Nicely done, Rambo. Now the professor is telling me to get back in my seat or else I’ll get kicked out of the lecture, who does he think he is? Telling me what to do, like he runs this place. Oh well, just shake it off, shake it off, you’ll do better next time.

Come on Iran

I know that the Democracy in Iran is weak at best, but their current president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has publicly denied the Holocaust having happened and is openly anti-American, has some serious competition. I don't know much about Mir Hossein Mousavi, a former Iranian Prime Minister and currently the strongest competitor to the President, but I know this: President Ahmadinejad is a hardline extremist, and new leadership could potentially lead to a beneficial, if tenuous Iran-US relationship that could positively alter the way we look at the Middle East. Here's rooting for change.

Someone Bring Me A Chair

Now for something a little different than usual.... 

Someone Bring Me A Chair

“Ok, I’ll make you a deal. I’ll go get my toe looked at, but only if you go to the eye doctor and finally get yourself some new glasses and stop complaining about not being able to see.”

“Fine.”
“Fine.”
“Deal.”
“Deal.”

We shook on it – a silly, ceremonial gesture overseen by wry smiles and winking eyes. Neither of us actually wanted to go to our respective doctors and take care of our relatively simple ailments.

I don’t quite know when it happened, but I undeniably fell into the stereotype that men avoid the doctor at all costs. I can honestly remember telling myself that under no circumstances would I become that asshole coughing up a lung or bleeding from his ears that said, “No, really. I’m fine. Just … someone bring me a chair. I just need to sit for a minute and I’ll be good to go,” and actually mean it.

The moment I decided not to be that guy: I strolled through the front door of my parents house after a particularly rough baseball practice, still riding the high brought on by the freedom of being sixteen and able to drive myself around, when my sister, near tears, ran up to me.

“Dad fell off a ladder!!” “What? Where?!” “Backyard. He’s just lying there.” I sprinted through the house, out the open back door, three steps to the porch railing, vaulted myself over it and landed next to my father who lay motionless next to a now broken ladder. “…Dad…?”

He rolled over. “That fucking hurt.”
“Are you ok?”
“Ladder just gave out and down I went. Landed right on top of it. Broke the fucker.”
“You landed on the ladder? How high were you?”
“Top rung. Had to trim a branch.”

It was then that I looked up to the tree and noticed his 18’ tree pruner (basically a saw on a pole for cutting hard-to-reach branches from tall trees) hanging precariously from a half-sawed branch. “Ok, Dad. We’ve gotta move you.” I bent at the knees, preparing to lift my not-so-light father. I threw his arm over my shoulder and he doubled over in pain, grabbing at his chest. “Or maybe we should call an ambulance, Old Man.”  
“Fuck that. Bring me a chair. I just need to sit for a minute and I’ll be good to go. And bring me some water. And Crown.”

Turns out Dad broke two ribs and fractured his back, but we didn’t find that out until he went to the doctor … four weeks later. So I decided I wouldn’t be that guy.

It’s not that doctors scare me, or their offices or even hospitals. I consider myself in good health, even if WebMD has turned me (and, admit it, you, too) into a closet hypochondriac convinced that I’m tired not because I was up late working last night but because I have the diabetic AIDS cancer I’ve read so much about. My mood upon leaving a doctor’s office is, more often than not, optimistic that I very probably will not be dying of some medical cause in the immediate future. All in all, no real reason to fear the doctor. If anything, I should welcome the word of an expert, a professional, telling me that my headache is being caused by stress and not a sinus infection that spread into brain cancer, leaving me only two weeks to live (and I’ve still so much to do).

It surprised me, then, to find myself displaying much the same attitude as my father.

“Does this look like an ingrown toenail to you?”
“Sure does.”
“You’re not even looking”
She sighed, loudly, as she put down her book to glance at my toe. “I’ve no idea. I don’t know what an ingrown toenail looks like. But it definitely looks like it hurts.”
“Please. I can take the pain. I’ll be fine.” It did hurt. And looked awful.

WebMD more or less confirmed for me that I did indeed have what looked like it may well have been an ingrown toenail, complete with a nasty infection. But they also offered home remedies – no need for a visit to the doc.

I traveled back home for the winter holidays and my mom, being a mom, asked about my toe. Naturally, I said that it was fine even as it sat wrapped in a Band-Aid smothered in Neosporin and screaming for some antibiotics lest the infection spread and kill me. We have three dogs at my parents house, and errant paws run rampant through the house. Unfortunately for me, one landed squarely on my toe. Now, I can take pain, but this sent me to the floor … and my mom sent me to the urgent care center.

“Yup. Your toe is definitely infected. We’ll get you some antibiotics and fix you right up.”
“So it’s not an ingrown toenail?”
“Nope. Just infected. Take these twice a day for ten days and it should knock out the infection.”

This conversation happened with two different doctors. Twice the infection returned. I took a different route.

“Foot Doctors, how can we help you?”
“Hi, yeah, um, I need to make an appointment for my toe.”
“Do you have insurance?”
“Yeah. I found you on my insurance website. You’re in network.”
“Ok. How’s three weeks from now?”
“You don’t have anything earlier?”
“No.”
“Oh.”
“Does that work for you?”
“Yeah. Sure. That’ll be fine. Something in the middle of the day would be great.”
“Ok. Three Wednesdays from now, 1:30.” I gave her my info and set up the appointment.

For those of you that don’t know, medical care in New York City is excellent if you can find a doctor that you trust. The only problem is that you have to wait an hour or two once you get there. And you have to arrive before your scheduled appointment time as most offices charge you a fee if you’re late. I did not know this before I showed up just on time for my appointment … and sat in the waiting room for an hour.

But once the doctor saw me, it was quick.

Nurse: “Take off your shoes and socks. Sit on the chair. Put your feet up. The doctor will see you in a minute.”

I took off my shoes and socks, removed my seemingly ever-present bandage from my toe and waited. The doctor strolled in wearing the usual white coat but minus the stethoscope. I guess I should have guessed at that. I didn’t really think that he’d need to check my heartbeat from my feet, but my mental image of a doctor always has a stethoscope. It just feels right.

“Ok, which toe?”
“Uh, the one that looks like it needs medical attention.”
“Woah. That thing’s a party favor. How long has it been like that?”
“About … maybe four months?”
“Four months?”
“Maybe longer. I went to an urgent care center and they told me it was infected but not ingrown.”
“Why’d you go to a GP? You wouldn’t go to a neurologist for a broken finger, would you?”
“No.”
“Next time come to me first. It would’ve saved you time, money, and lots of pain. Now, let’s get that toe fixed.”
“Now?” He had already grabbed a syringe and plunged it into a bottle, slowly drawing out the clear liquid.
“Yup. This will hurt a bit, but I’m going to numb up your toe, dig out the nail and remove the infection. Get ready for a pinch … now.”

For those of you fortunate enough to have missed the exquisite pain involved in being stabbed in the toe, let me tell you that your toes are surprisingly sensitive. The “pressure” he was talking about … anvil dropped on the toe. Surgical strike of acute pain. The bastard stabbed me in the toe! With a needle! He caused intense pain in order to numb it. It didn’t seem fair.

“I’ll be back in about five minutes and we’ll fix you right up.”

Five minutes passed where the feeling in my toe disappeared.

“Ok! Ready?” He flicked at my toe. “Feel that?”
“Not really.”
“Excellent. You’re ready.”

He dove right in. Taking what looked a bit too much like a wire cutter, he started hacking away at my nail, cutting straight down and losing his nail clipper under my skin. He cut out a sizable chunk of my nail and a good piece of skin. This all should have been quite painful. Instead I stared jaw-dropped and felt nothing.

“There. You’re done. Put this cream on the toe, wear a Band-Aid and everything will be fine.”
“No antibiotics?”
“Nope. I told you, go to the expert first and save yourself some hassle.”

I still don’t know how I got to be “that guy” who avoided the doctor, but here I am again, another toe with an ingrown nail and in so much pain I can barely walk. Just, someone bring me a chair. I’m fine.

Swine Flu Justice

The world media, and, truly, the world in general, has been all aflutter over the recent Swine Flu (H1N1 flu, hybrid flu … a rose by any other name, right?) epidemic (when a disease hits many people all at once in one locality where the disease is not normally present) or pandemic (a country- or world-wide epidemic) or whatever status we’re assigning it.

My question is: why?

Worldwide, according to the NY Times, about 800 people have been infected, with zero US deaths. Each year about 36,000 Americans die from seasonal influenza. This outbreak of swine flu gripping the world in fear seems to be much milder than everyone initially feared; milder, in fact, than the regular flu. There is a chance that it could mutate and become horrifying, but until then…

… let’s move on to more important things.

Justice David H. Souter recently announced his retirement from the Supreme Court. The problems that President Obama has faced in his first several months in office have been global and daunting. His decisions and policies about how to tackle these challenges will doubtless be long lasting and important.

That being said, his choice to replace Justice Souter might just turn out to be his most important decision that he will make as President.

It may be difficult to see this now, but I believe that the worst thing that happened under President Bush II was his appointment of TWO ultra conservative justices to the Bench. Most presidents don’t get to appoint any Supreme Court justices, and an administration that most Americans want desperately to forget was fortunate enough to appoint two.

The reason that Supreme Court appointments are so important is that justices long outlast the presidents that appoint them. Justices hold their seat on the Bench until they decide to retire (or they become unable to perform their duties), and their rulings potentially change the course of the country (Roe v. Wade and  Brown v. Board come to mind as just those kinds of cases).

I’m optimistic about President Obama’s pending nomination, but not because I think he will appoint a well-known liberal to replace the left-leaning Souter. President Obama is so appealing because of his obvious intelligence and the way he appears to deeply contemplate everything. He weighs issues, seeing them from multiple points of view, and then delivers an eloquent decision. Basically, he is incredibly smart and makes thought-out, informed decisions. I am absolutely sure that he will nominate someone with similar insight and thoroughness.

Many in the media are clamoring to predict his woman or minority nominee. Although I do think that a woman should be nominated (there is currently only one woman on the Bench), I do not think that gender or race should be at the top of the list of criteria.

As a constitutional law professor at one of the most prestigious law schools in the world, President Obama earned a reputation as a vehement pragmatist in his interpretation of constitutional law. I imagine (hope, even) that he will appoint a like-minded person to the Bench. Some liberals might not be happy about that, but, really, a pragmatic and thoughtful Justice would almost always side against conservative rulings, and, in fact, might do some work to reverse some of the recent laws that allow the government to spy on citizens (put into law under President Obama).

However this goes, Mr. Obama’s nominee will likely face little to no challenge in his/her appointment. Republicans will surely make a fuss and try very hard to denounce the nominee, but the Democratic majority in the Senate will make blocking an appointment incredibly difficult.

I am confident that this president, unlike his predecessor, will take this nomination seriously and appoint someone that I will trust to hear each case objectively, weighing the case against the spirit of constitutionality and leave personal politics at the door.

This could be President Obama’s most important and lasting decision in office. This is a difficult and important test for a young president with much to prove. Here’s hoping he passes it.

The Pakistan Problem

The Democratic Party doesn’t really have a reputation as the party of war, and in recent years, the Republicans have painted Democrats as lily academics, scared to get their hands dirtied by hard work or the blood of war. Basically, the general opinion of some Americans (as far as I can piece together from political campaigns and opinion polls of the recent past) is that Democrats are weak and need the Republicans to defend them (and the country).

President Obama recently had the opportunity to change that when he dealt with Somali pirates that attacked a US registered ship and took its captain hostage. Mr. Obama ordered Navy SEALS to use whatever force they deemed necessary to rescue the captain, and on April 13, SEAL snipers killed 3 pirates, rescuing the captain. President Obama made it known that if you attack an American, the consequences will be swift and fierce – and I applaud him for that, as did many Republicans that feared he would be a soft leader.

He needs to maintain that fierceness, though.

Pakistan appears to have completely given up their fight against Taliban insurgents as the Taliban move closer and closer to Pakistan’s capitol city of Islamabad. As the insurgency approaches to the capitol, the Pakistani government barely lifts a finger to stop the advance. Last week the Taliban took control of the Buner district, a mere 60 miles from Islamabad and the government’s response was to send constabulary forces (not military, mind you) to lose an almost non-contested fight for control of the district.

It’s not as if Pakistan is lacking in military prowess. They’re a recognized nuclear state (remember the India/Pakistan nuclear tests?), and a major power in the region. Oh, and they receive one billion dollars a year from the US in military aid to boost their standing army of 500,000 people and help them fight off insurgencies like this (we provide them aid to help maintain and protect their fragile democratic government).

The idea of rogue groups having nuclear weapons is frightening enough, but the idea of Iran going nuclear AND the Taliban taking over an already nuclear state is outright horrifying.

Now, I’m a sissy Democrat and opposed the war in Iraq, but we’re invested quite heavily in the region. We may not be well liked, and it may not be right of us, but we’re still the world’s super power and consider it our duty to try to keep peace in the region, often by our political and military might. 

President Obama will have to make tough decisions throughout his presidency, indeed he has had to make tough decisions from Day 1. But his decision on how best to deal with the Pakistan situation could well shape the course of his tenure as leader of the free world. Not being a high ranking military or political figure, I can only offer a mere civilian’s (and an urban Democrat, at that) thoughts to the matter.

The US needs to take a military stand in Pakistan.

Yes, that would create incredible tension between our two governments and it would likely outrage many in the region. But the two days leading to the announcement that the Taliban took Buner were the two of deadliest days in Iraq. We have been bombing lawless regions in Pakistan where terrorists and Afghan insurgents are hiding out. Is it that hard to believe that we Pakistan plays a huge role in potentially keeping peace in the region? I don’t think so.

I don’t know how, exactly, this military presence should be made in Pakistan, and I’ll leave that up to our military leaders, but I do know that Pakistan’s democracy cannot fall to the Taliban. It would cause regional upheaval and give an extreme and unpredictable group state-controlled nuclear weapons and legitimacy. And it could very likely cause another war between India and Pakistan.

Here’s hoping this problem is dealt with swiftly and effectively.

Nuclear North Korea

President Obama just finished up his first G20 meeting and a trip that took him through Europe to Turkey and ended in Iraq. This was the first time he was could showcase his international political skills as President.

But the real test to President Obama and Hillary Clinton has come from the always troublesome of North Korea. In the past few weeks North Korea has been preparing to put a satellite into orbit using a three stage rocket.

Despite urging from nearly every country with global clout, including (sort of) China and Russia not to go through with it, North Korea launched the rocket towards space.

Now, if you get your news from sources within North Korea, you’d be under the impression that the launch was a success and a satellite is currently hurtling around in low earth orbit while sending patriotic music back to their Dear Leader (not even kidding, they have to say this when referencing him. Punishable by imprisonment), Kim Jong-Il. If you read uncensored news sources, you’d be under the impression that all three rocket stages and the payload fell back to Earth, not making it into orbit.

The question now becomes: how should the world respond? Most countries see this launch as a blatant attempt by North Korea to show that they can launch an ICBM and reach faraway targets, presumably with a nuclear warhead attached (because, remember, they’ve been trying to become nuclear capable for some time now and have been in six nation talks to stop the program).

Barack Obama has appealed to the UN Security Council to take action against North Korea. Probably the response will be watered down by Russia and China. The goal here should be to use this as a way to further Mr. Obama’s desire to end nuclear proliferation by citing the dangers or rogue regimes achieving nuclear capabilities and ignoring the safety of the world.

Despite the ties between Russia and North Korea, I think that North Korea’s blatant dismissal of international wishes can be a way to convince Russia we live in a time when the possession of nuclear weapons by rogue states or groups is increasingly more dangerous than the possession of nuclear weapons by nations that seem to have enough sense not to use them.

The takeaway from this situation, I believe, is that North Korea is a dangerous country, akin to a wild dog, that desperately wants to be taken seriously and they need to be punished – and not taken seriously. Ideally, Mr. Obama can appeal to North Korea’s allies/suppliers and use the influence of Iran, Russia, and China over North Korea to punish Kim Jong-Il and find a common issue that can act as a base to rebuild relations.

North Korea attempted to use the launch as a means to increase their political capital, but I think that Mr. Obama should use the launch as a means to leverage his own international political capital to pull together countries that have before been seen as enemies and strengthen America’s place as the super power.

 

Presidential Availability

It’s an interesting exercise to think about the American government as a business – with the President as the CEO and the voters both as customers and as shareholders. The President interviews for a job with his campaign and we give him the job based on our votes, and then we use government programs.

The last administration seemed to carry with it an air of aloofness. As an everyday American that happened to devour news, I found it difficult to get adequate answers from high ranking officials about issues small or large, and policy answers proved even more elusive. Sure, we heard talking points and well-scripted answers that kept a veil of secrecy up between government and the people it served, but that just never seemed to cut it for me.

Maybe I’m being a bit harsh on the Bush administration in terms of transparency in governing (and I understand that some parts of the government should be kept secret), but something tells me that more than a few people share my belief.

This new administration charged into the White House on the backs of small donations (and, really, huge donations from corporations and special interest groups) with the help of the Internet. I don’t know about you, but I was almost sick of receiving emails from Barack Obama during the campaign. And I liked it.

President Obama promised to change the politics of Washington, and while we all knew this to be hyperbolic, it appears that he is at least trying earnestly to change the availability and transparency of the Office of the President and, indeed, of the President himself.

In the past two weeks, President Obama has been on Leno and 60 Minutes and he held a virtual town hall meeting on CNN where he answered questions from attendees (there live) and the Web. The President is making himself available to the American Public.

I’m stunned.

It’s amazing. I actually feel like President Obama can be reached. Back when I was a kid, if I had some kind of monumental complaint, my mom/teachers/whoever would tell me to write my Congressman, basically letting me know that my complaint was falling on deaf ears, with no solution in sight.

Now, it seems, our President is following in the footsteps of FDR’s famous fireside chats and reaching out to the people, actually hearing our concerns and letting us know what the government is doing to help. The President spent most of his time explaining his budget, his stimulus plan, and his view on the future of the economy (bleak, but, thankfully, fairly realistic), but he had time to crack some jokes as well. Yes, the Office of the President is still difficult to reach, but not impossible.

President Obama started his term facing monstrous obstacles, and while I don’t always agree with all of his policies and decisions, it calms me to know that he is an incredibly smart man that takes his job, and his country, seriously. I hope he continues to reach out to us, the American public, explaining his decisions and listening to our thoughts/fears/concerns/ideas.

He may not take our views into consideration as much as we’d like, and he likely cannot save the jobs we’d like him to save or quickly turn around the economy, but, hey, he’s not Superman. As long as he keeps himself available and attempts to increase the transparency of governance, he can start to cause actual change in Washington: bringing our Democracy (republic, really) back to the spirit of Democracy where every citizen’s voice actually matters.

I could get quite used to four years of this.

Gratuitous Cash

The talk of the town as of late has been AIG and the $165,000,000 in bonuses paid to executives … after receiving more than $170,000,000,000 in bailout money. The public, the government, the media, everyone, really (except for those receiving the bonuses, of course), is upset and appalled at this egregious amount of money in the face of our faltering economy.

Here are the numbers, according to New York attorney general Andrew Cuomo: 418 employees received bonuses. 298 of them received bonuses of $100,000 or more, with 73 of them receiving at least one million dollars. A lot of money, to be sure.

It seems almost a no-brainer that this is a ridiculous waste of taxpayer money and that something should be done about it, right? President Obama and Congress are working on just that – they’re taking this populist sentiment being spewed from all corners of the country and attempting to pass legislation that recoups the expense of the bonuses.

The US government, after all the bailout money, owns upwards of 80% of AIG, more than enough to attack this issue from the standpoint of owner of the company as opposed to a regulatory body. The controlling stake and finances that we (speaking as a taxpayer) have in the company certainly allow the government to take a more active role in employee compensation, and after all the talk about limiting executive pay in companies that accepted bailout money, the government almost has to take action.

Should it?

Everyone is looking for some place to put all of their anger at the failing economy, a scapegoat to take the blame for all that’s going wrong. It’s easy to point fingers – at banks, at lack of market regulation, at mortgage companies, at AIG, at people living beyond their means, at Bernie Madoff … people are flinging blame at anything it’ll stick to. Which, fine, I understand your anger. The economy is in shambles, people were seemingly bamboozled into accepting bad mortgages, the promise of the ever growing market is letting us down, and the world economy is on the brink of collapse.

As has been thoroughly noted in the press, many of the executives receiving the bonuses ran the financial services part of the company responsible for much of the unchecked risk that is largely responsible for the company’s current predicament. These executives, it seems, are being rewarded for driving the company into the ground and nearly taking the economy with it.

But the AIG employees that received bonuses were owed them contractually. AND nearly all of them offered to give the money back (AIG also reportedly asked all employees receiving $100,000 or more to give at least half of the money back). Is it too little, too late? Or should they even give the money back?

I understand the public outcry, I mean, I certainly would like a hundred thousand dollar bonus. Hell, I’d like a thousand dollar bonus. But it’s not in my contract to receive a ridiculously huge bonus. I can’t wrap my head around the unintended consequences of the government stepping in, even as primary shareholder, and reneging on a contract. That would set a precedent for avoiding unfortunate contractual obligations.

Many companies are taking preventative measures and reducing bonuses or freezing salaries, but these companies are, in general, communicating these decisions with employees, NOT giving them a bonus or a raise and asking for it back (except, of course, Microsoft and that whole asking for severance pay to be returned fiasco). It just seems that allowing companies to break contracts due to the whimsy of public opinion.

Does this mean that financial companies should pay outrageous bonuses to their employees? No. Does it mean that AIG should just give out bonuses all willy-nilly? Absolutely not.

It is unbelievably irresponsible for AIG to pay out such massive bonuses after taking so much taxpayer money and needing to be bailed out from bankruptcy several times. It is commendable that the employees are offering to give their bonuses back, but that makes me think that they’re overpaid anyway if they can afford to return over a hundred thousand dollars. Perhaps the “leadership” at AIG could have had the foresight to understand that giving out a hundred million dollars in bonuses would create a public backlash, but, then, if they had any kind of foresight, perhaps they could have avoided this mess all together. 

Don't Let Them Fail

Print newspapers are in trouble of going out of business all across the country, and we can’t let this happen. An article yesterday in the NY Times (link) talks about the trend of large cities with two major papers are facing the economic crunch by turning into one paper towns, and one paper markets are facing the realities of life without a major local newspaper.

This is a trend that must be stopped.

A lot of you are probably thinking that maybe the fall of the printed newspaper won’t be such a bad thing, that they can survive in electronic form, and, indeed, some folks make that argument in the Times piece. I believe that those people are sadly mistaken.

Yes, some form of the newspapers will likely survive and live on the Internet, but it will hardly be a newspaper. I cannot imagine online ad revenues funding a newsroom (or if they can fund the newsroom, it’ll almost certainly be a skeleton crew of reporters) outside of a bare minimum of editors. And these editors very likely won’t be doing a huge amount of reporting, but, rather, will be in charge of pulling stories from newswires like Reuters and the Associated Press (AP).

It is not my intention here to say that newswires do not report quality news, they do. The problem that would arise is twofold.

First, this would basically eliminate local news. Newswires don’t make their money by reporting local news stories, they generally provide only national and international news stories and provide smaller, regional papers (that can’t afford international correspondents) with their world news. While some of you might think that national and international news is the only news worth reading, I think you’d be missing out so so much. Book reviews, the classifieds, job listings, film reviews, music reviews, restaurant reviews, editorials, the culture section, local sports beats, arts, entertainment, local event listings, local nightlife information, local features, local flavor, local vernacular … all of this and more would be completely eliminated from your life. Sure, some of it would be replaced by random online sites, but it’ll be a hodgepodge of different sites that likely will not cover everything quite the same way a well-run newspaper would.

The second issue involves something that is often complained about now: monopoly. One complaint about the current news industry is that large papers (NY Times, Wall Street Journal, LA Times) have a monopoly of news reporting. I don’t agree with this, but it’s a fair complaint. The NY Times is almost universally considered the Paper of Record, but I’m just fine with that. Imagine what would happen if even half of America’s major cities took the majority of their news from one of three major newswires? Now that would constitute a monopoly (or oligopoly, I suppose) of news reporting. 

Newspapers need to find new revenue. I, for one, think that charging for online readership is just the way to do it. Online viewers far outnumber hard-copy readers, and since a major source of revenue (print ads) have disappeared recently, new subscriptions from online readers would significantly boost revenue, even if it scared away some readers (I would definitely pay a monthly/yearly fee for a trusted source of news).

A world without trusted major newspapers is one that I not only can’t imagine, but don’t want to be a part of. Newspapers need to bite the bullet, make like the Journal and charge for online material. Readers need to suck it up and pay for it. 

Legalization

This week the cover of The Economist boasts “How to stop the drug wars” and shows a witty little picture of a skull outlined by guns and a cannabis leaf. The image is jarring and the subject thought provoking. How do you stop the drug wars?

The British newsweekly concludes that the least of all evils is to legalize drugs … across the globe.

They make some excellent points and their overall argument sounds reasonable, and, I must admit, I have given thought about the legalization of certain illegal things as viable options – prostitution and marijuana are two examples. Legalized prostitution would, in theory vastly improve the lives of prostitutes – they could unionize, get benefits, arrange for proper healthcare and disease prevention/treatment, there would be extensive regulation etc. Marijuana is already legally used for medicinal purposes and is arguably a safer drug than either alcohol or tobacco, yet it remains illegal.

The problem that I run into with the legalization of “drugs” in general is that, while some drugs may be fine for general consumption, I can’t really picture the safe use of drugs like heroine or LSD. It can be argued, though, and is, that legalizing all drugs will allow for several positive things.

First is that drug abuse would be treated as a medical issue instead of a criminal issue, a huge benefit to drug abusers and the legal system. Legalization would also allow for the regulation of drugs, stopping the practice of lacing street drugs (already dangerous by themselves) with pharmaceuticals to boost profit. This regulation would also eliminate a black market and organized crime from the mix (mostly. There is still a large organized crime presence surrounding tobacco and alcohol, so it wouldn’t disappear completely). Drug education could also become much more mainstream in schools, warning kids of the negative effects of drugs (like we already do with tobacco and alcohol) in the hopes that education will reduce drug abuse.

Perhaps the most beneficial reason for legalizing drugs in light of the world’s economic woes is the huge influx of cash from the inevitable drug tax. Tobacco and alcohol already have hefty taxes imposed on them (tobacco especially) and people still buy booze and cigarettes in droves. The amount of users that a tax would scare away would likely be offset by the amount of new users that legalization would bring to drug stores (ha!).

But therein lies another issue. Do we want to invite drug use? It’s a measured risk, really. New drug revenue could fund drug education and treatment for abuse, and a more educated public, in theory, would use drugs in moderation, the assumption already used for alcohol consumption.

It’s a thorny issue, legalization, and there is no easy answer. But as The Economist and most every statistic I could find shows, the War on Drugs is not going well. The solution will not be easy, and it likely will not be unanimously loved, but who knows, maybe legalization really can be a viable option. I mean, look how successful prohibition was in the US…

E-Readers - The End or Future of Publishing?

I have recently become an owner of, dare I say, an electronic book reader – the Sony Reader, complete with a plethora of electronic books to read. Now, I am a book person. I work in publishing, I read books both for pleasure and for work. I devour print news from as many sources as possible, and I fancy myself a writer.

Publishers appear to fear for the future of books, magazine, and newspapers.

But I’m not sure that they should be. Books, magazines, and newspapers are tangible, real. They’ve been around for centuries. They bring people together, they tear people apart, they teach us, entertain us, enlighten us, provide us with opinions, they allow us to lose ourselves in a story … oh, and books look great on a shelf.

The Sony Reader is incredibly convenient … but possibly unnecessary. It holds upwards of a thousand books, which is nice, except why would I regularly need even ten books on me at once? The Reader is great for public transportation and presumably an extended vacation with lots of reading planned, but for sitting down for a nice read in the park or on the couch, I just can’t see myself picking up an electronic book.

At least not right now.

The future of devices like the Sony Reader can definitely be bright. The Ipod started as a device that only played music – already cooler and more practical than an electronic book – and helped people store not so portable music into a super portable device. The Ipod has continued to dominate the market and change the face of portable electronics because it continues to do more and more.

Electronic books like the Sony Reader and Amazon Kindle can revolutionize the publishing world … once they become more than just book readers, that is. I imagine a device that, for a fee, can bring you magazines and newspapers electronically, as well as your books (and the Kindle 2 is starting to do this). Publishers can charge per book – ebooks are already out there (obviously), the trick is being able to keep margins up.

E-readers can actually save news publications, I think, if publishers embrace them. More people are reading news dailies online than in print, and most large papers offer online readership for free. I can’t speak for all people, but I would pay a fee to subscribe to a news daily on my electronic reader. Perhaps a portable, convenient reader is just what the newspapers need to increase subscriptions and boost their revenue.

Portable electronic readers can be a convenient device for people in urban centers that regularly use public transportation, but without modifications and multiple uses, the readers will never replace books. They have the opportunity to have an impact on all aspects of publishing, and I think it can be for the better. And for all those book people out there, books will still be around. But you might want to clear a spot on your shelf for your electronic reader.

Housing "Hope"

When the news constantly speaks of doom, gloom, your shrinking 401(k), job losses, the end of the world as we know it, and your bills seem more and more ominous, the prospect of the government stepping in and helping out Middle America sounds like the break everyone seems to be waiting for.

The economy is suffering from a great many ailments, and one of them is a complete lack of hope in, well, everything. Lenders don’t trust borrowers, borrowers don’t trust lenders, consumers don’t trust producers, the East doesn’t trust the West, and nobody trusts Wall Street. People have no hope. President Obama hopes (ha!) to curtail this hopelessness with the new housing bill.

This country has, for its entirety, firmly believed in the American Dream, the belief that anyone can make it big or strike it rich, that you can pull yourself up by your bootstraps. The housing crisis is taking away hope in the American Dream. If you borrowed more money against your house than it’s worth and can’t make your payments, you’re at risk of foreclosure, and you didn’t make a very sound financial decision. If your mortgage payments are incredibly high and you can’t afford them, you either made a bad financial decision or you’re getting screwed by your lender – either way you’re not in a good way.

These people seem to be the real victims of the housing crisis: the homeowners that continue to make their mortgage payments, but struggle, either due to increasing mortgage rates, housing value deflation, or just the state of the economy in general. This new housing bill likely will not help these people out too much.

Housing Secretary Shaun Donovan explains that “there are no 'flippers,' investor-owners or scammers that are eligible for this program.”[1] That’s great, but something about this bill doesn’t sit quite right with me. Although the administration touts the bill as helping millions of Americans that are stuck with mortgages worth more than the value of their home, it will only allow mortgage restructuring for these kinds of loans backed by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, a relatively small amount. There are also a host of other limitations (valuation cap, rate floor, etc) for being able to refinance your mortgage if you’re struggling to make payments.

With all of the money going into insolvent banks that made poor financial decisions, where the government threw hundreds of billions of dollars at the problem, one would think that giving all homeowners a helping hand here would be doable. Why not offer refinancing opportunities to all homeowners? It seems absurd that next door neighbors, both struggling, could receive vastly different amounts of help for the same (or at least an incredibly similar) problem.

This country (for the most part) is an equal opportunity meritocracy. Shouldn’t a plan to help homeowners offer equal opportunity aid?

[1] http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/22/obama.housing/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

Cell Phones in Schools? For Learning?!

Mobile Learning ’09 is a conference held in Washington, DC this week that focuses on using mobile communications technology in education[1]. Yes, that’s right, this conference revolves around the idea that cell phones not only should be used in schools, but that used properly, cell phones can improve student performance.

Outside of teachers and those of my generation, the use of cell phones in schools was never an issue. Even for me, I never had a cell phone until I had a car, and even then, my parents controlled my plan, and it was paltry – I really could only use the phone for emergencies … and that seemed about right.

I spent some time as an assistant teacher in a public elementary school in NYC, and some of my students had nicer cell phones than I did. I mean, what does a ten year old need with a BlackBerry!? What can he possibly be doing that would add to his educational experience? This is the question that CITA, a cell phone trade group, is trying to answer with research funded by Qualcomm (a cell phone chip maker).

The gist of their argument is this: smartphones can provide a cheap alternative to laptops as mobile learning devices in the classroom. Basically, makers of smartphones want to score a contract with the education system to provide students with handheld computers (smartphones) to help with their studies.

The Qualcomm study gave test 10^th grade students smartphones with applications designed to help them with their algebra coupled with a private social networking site that allows them to share tips and solutions with other students in the class. Apparently, students that used the smartphones and social networking scored 25% higher on the end-of-the-year algebra exam than students that didn’t use the smartphones[2].

That’s all fine and good, but I can hardly think that a smartphone could ever replace computers as learning tools. Laptops can help teachers show students to use the internet for research, to write papers, to teach more than one student at a time, and can even be used for educational games. Sure, they’re more expensive, but wouldn’t it make more sense to have one or a couple roaming laptop (with enough computers for one or two classrooms to use at a time) cart for a school than handing all of the students smartphones? I just can’t see phones not being a distraction for students, especially if the students can use the smartphones as actual phones or for texting.

Potentially my biggest issue with the use of smartphones is the way that text messaging and social network sites are killing writing ability. Internet acronyms, as I call the shortcuts used in texting and instant messenging like lol or omg or ttyl, may well be the downfall of civilization and culture as we know it.

Ok ok, that’s overly dramatic and hyperbolic … maybe. I can’t imagine a smartphone used in a classroom could possibly improve students’ writing skills or help a student research and write a paper. Sure, the students would have incredibly agile thumbs, but is that enough? It seems to me that the cell phone industry is really just promoting the next generation calculator, and that’s something I can get behind: smart calculators that help students solve problems and share solution tips with each other.

But the idea that cell phones could replace computers as learning/teaching devices in classrooms just makes me laugh my ass off, or, if you prefer, LMAO.

 

---

[1] http://www.mobilelearning09.org/index.html

[2] http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/16/technology/16phone.html?ref=technology

No Sympathy Here

Apparently, a $500,000 a year salary is barely enough to survive. According to Allen Salkin of the New York Times, after taxes, private schools, nannies, chauffeurs (salary range: $75,000 - $125,000 a year), mortgages (on their Upper East Side condo and million dollar homes in the Hamptons), vacations, galas, expensive clothing, and other life essentials, the $500,000 is all but completely gone.

The editorial goes on to say that top bank executives more or less have to spend that kind of money – because of peer pressure. When you work in a field where the culture relies on heavy spending to denote success, “it’s like the same thing that goes back to high school peer pressure. It’s about fitting in.”[1] Well forgive me for not sympathizing with your plight.

You know, I live in NYC at roughly one fifteenth of that salary and I am able to sustain myself fairly well, although clearly not as luxuriously as some. Really, it almost makes me feel bad for the mega rich, myself, and the future of the country. If the people put in charge of running the financial system can’t properly manage their own financial lives on $500,000 every year, then how are we supposed to have faith in the industry?

Sure, many intelligent and decent people work in banking. And yes, I imagine that the pressures and demands placed on you are pretty great, but let’s put them in perspective for a moment. Do you deal with life and death on a daily basis? Are you sent off to fight a war you may or may not support? Do you work your ass off at three jobs and still barely manage to scrape by because you’re paid $8.50 an hour? Will you be losing your home because a bank hooked you up with god awful mortgage rates?

I mean, your job is mostly about crunching numbers, in a completely oversimplified definition. You run the banks that fuel the economy through credit. You make tough decisions and determine the fate of companies and individuals alike. Your jobs are difficult and demanding, but hardly the stuff of life or death.

When a complaint goes out from executives earning more money in one year than most Americans won’t make in twenty, don’t expect those complaints to fall on sympathetic ears.

Note to bankers: if you make $500,000 a year, you’re hardly struggling. Make some tough decisions in your own life. Pull your kid from that private school and enroll them in public education, then use some of that political leverage to get public schools some of the funding it deserves. Take public transportation. Use your collective real estate clout to bring housing prices in NYC down to a realistic level. Fly coach. Move to Harlem.

The American public might start to take that stigma away if the financial industry fell back down to earth. Now we’ll just have to wait for entertainers and athletes. Here’s hoping in a few years I’ll be able to afford concert, films, and ballgames again…

[1] Salkin, Allen. "You Try to Live on 500K in This Town." The New York Times 6 Feb. 2009. 9 Feb. 2009 .